DESOLATION ROAD: Armageddon on the Potomac
DESOLATION ROAD
The Heretik Notes It Was a Dreary Scene in the Senate Yesterday Right from Frist’s Frightening Get Up and Go to Hell Democrats Opening Statement
Any Republican who thinks Frist has a serious chance of becoming president might want to tell Doctor Doom he needs to work on his graveside manner.
Frist is no Doctor Pepper. Schumer crushed him like a can at the recycling center. And speaking of recycling center, there is such a thing as sticking too much to the talking points. UNPRECEDENTED. UP AND DOWN VOTE. Rinse and Repeat on the Brainwashing. The Heretik heard an unprecedented repetition of the words up and down yesterday. If the Republicans think that will get them the ultimate up, they could be going down. No imagination whatsoever.
Parents should take children off the street when the mortician Frist drives the Doom Mobile hearse down the street. His assault on decency in saying the Dems are trying to assassinate judges was way over the top, even for the Mister Clean down and dirty doctor.
YESTERDAY’S WINNER: Charles Schumer.
YESTERDAY’S LOSER: Doctor Doom “Medical Bill” Frist
NOW FOR SOME LINKS
SO YOU CAN SEE HOW THIS SAD SAUSAGE IN THE SENATE IS GETTING MADE:
FRIST OPENING STATEMENT May 18,2005
REID OPENING STATEMENT May 18,2005
TOP TEN LIES ABOUT THE FILIBUSTER MEDIA MATTERS
CASE AGAINST PRISCILLA OWEN PFAW
CASE AGAINST JANICE ROGERS BROWN PFAW
GOING NUCLEAR CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS
KAGRO X: NOTES ON THE NUCLEAR OPTION NEXT HURRAH
THE DECEMBRIST
Mark Schmitt has many posts worth checking on his sidebar.
POLITICAL BEDTIMES STORIES
These Could Keep You Up at Night
HULK GETS NUKED: Six-term Sen. Ted Stevens is among the Senate's gruffest members on his best days, but on Feb. 26, 2003, he was downright angry. As Democrats blocked yet another one of President Bush's judicial nominees, he sat in a wooden chair in the Republican cloakroom and told a group of colleagues and aides, "We can put an end to this now!"
THE KILLER INSTINCT: The Republican leader, Bill Frist (Tenn.), was asked why he, the head of the anti-filibuster movement, had voted to uphold the filibuster of a judge in 2000. Frist at first stammered -- "Mr. President, the, in response, the Paez nomination, we'll come back and discuss it" -- and then settled on an answer: "It's not the cloture votes, per se," he said, using the term for filibuster-breaking votes. "It's the partisan leadership-led use of cloture to kill, to defeat, to assassinate these nominees."
BIG SURPRISE! At the White House, the official line on the fight over ending filibusters of judicial nominees is that it is a matter for the Senate to decide.
But behind the scenes, the White House, directly and through its allies, is playing an active role in keeping up the pressure on the Senate to assure that President Bush's nominees have up-or-down confirmation votes, Republicans involved in the effort said.
BOMBMAKING 101
Washington, D.C.: I am a novice to Senate rules and am still trying to figure out the mechanical steps of defeating the filibuster rule. Two questions: (1) Can you walk us through an expected chain of events; and (2) why can't Democrats filibuster a vote to end the filibuster?
Charles Babington: Good questions. It probably would go like this: At some point in the debate over a judge, Majority Leader Frist (or his designee) would seek a ruling from the chair that further debate is pointless and therefore out of order. The presiding officer (a Republican) would rule in Frist's favor. Democrats would appeal the chair's ruling. A Republican would immediately move to "table" (or kill) the Democrats' appeal. A tabling motion is not debatable. That's the key. Therefore a simple majority vote -- with VP Cheney breaking a 50-50 tie if needed-- would uphold the chair's ruling. From that point on, a new "precedent" would be in place effectively banning filibusters of appellate court nominees.
LIES: As we wait on the sidelines for the seemingly inevitable chain reaction to take place on the senate floor, it is worth observing and considering the fact that every Republican senator certainly knows that the proposition they're about to attest to is quite simply a lie.
These Could Keep You Up at Night
HULK GETS NUKED: Six-term Sen. Ted Stevens is among the Senate's gruffest members on his best days, but on Feb. 26, 2003, he was downright angry. As Democrats blocked yet another one of President Bush's judicial nominees, he sat in a wooden chair in the Republican cloakroom and told a group of colleagues and aides, "We can put an end to this now!"
THE KILLER INSTINCT: The Republican leader, Bill Frist (Tenn.), was asked why he, the head of the anti-filibuster movement, had voted to uphold the filibuster of a judge in 2000. Frist at first stammered -- "Mr. President, the, in response, the Paez nomination, we'll come back and discuss it" -- and then settled on an answer: "It's not the cloture votes, per se," he said, using the term for filibuster-breaking votes. "It's the partisan leadership-led use of cloture to kill, to defeat, to assassinate these nominees."
BIG SURPRISE! At the White House, the official line on the fight over ending filibusters of judicial nominees is that it is a matter for the Senate to decide.
But behind the scenes, the White House, directly and through its allies, is playing an active role in keeping up the pressure on the Senate to assure that President Bush's nominees have up-or-down confirmation votes, Republicans involved in the effort said.
BOMBMAKING 101
Washington, D.C.: I am a novice to Senate rules and am still trying to figure out the mechanical steps of defeating the filibuster rule. Two questions: (1) Can you walk us through an expected chain of events; and (2) why can't Democrats filibuster a vote to end the filibuster?
Charles Babington: Good questions. It probably would go like this: At some point in the debate over a judge, Majority Leader Frist (or his designee) would seek a ruling from the chair that further debate is pointless and therefore out of order. The presiding officer (a Republican) would rule in Frist's favor. Democrats would appeal the chair's ruling. A Republican would immediately move to "table" (or kill) the Democrats' appeal. A tabling motion is not debatable. That's the key. Therefore a simple majority vote -- with VP Cheney breaking a 50-50 tie if needed-- would uphold the chair's ruling. From that point on, a new "precedent" would be in place effectively banning filibusters of appellate court nominees.
LIES: As we wait on the sidelines for the seemingly inevitable chain reaction to take place on the senate floor, it is worth observing and considering the fact that every Republican senator certainly knows that the proposition they're about to attest to is quite simply a lie.
His assault on decency in saying the Dems are trying to assassinate judges was way over the top
Wait, I thought it was decent, God-fearin' 'Merkans who were killing judges out of frustration with all their activism and whatnot.
I'm so confused...
Posted by: Eli | May 19, 2005 at 05:23 PM
"Frist is no Doctor Pepper."
Absolutely not. We at the Pepper sneer at the thought. At best, he is Tab. He isn't even generic Big K. John Stossel wouldn't drink him if he were a soda pop.
Posted by: Pepper | May 19, 2005 at 10:59 PM